http://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=7417 --- Comment #26 from Chris Cormack <chris@bigballofwax.co.nz> --- (In reply to comment #25)
(In reply to comment #23)
I don't know, I think Moo is a good candidate for packaging ourselves, and using that instead of Moose for Solr, etc. It would be easy enough to do the packaging. I just tried it, and unlike when I tried to get Moose to compile, it worked without any major hitches.
We can rewrite Koha::SearchEngine::Solr with Moo. But this module use a Data::SearchEngine::Solr module which use Moose :-/ Then we have to rewrite this external library too to drop the Moose dependency.
All of which is a bit of a tangent. I would have no objection to rewriting Koha::Authority and the RecordProcessor stuff to use Moo, if there is a clear reason why it is better than using Class::Accessor.
I never used Moo and just used Moose for the Koha::SearchEngine::Solr. But I heard many good about it and it seems it is widely used now by Perl programmers communities. I am not attached or a fervent defender of any of them. However I'm convinced that Koha should have a powerfull and adapted object system. We want to write less code as possible then we have to choose a system with a minimum of code verbosity.
This isn't my goal, my goal is clean and tested code, verbosity has very little to do with that. Writing less code isn't inherently a good thing. So in order to have a consensus on how to achieve the goal, we need to have consensus on what that goal is.
In fact I think it will be difficult to have a consensus but all propositions must be considered in order to choose the most pertinent.
My 1st comment there was not to troll or to impose my choices. I just gave my opinion about introducing a new auth class without rules
However if each one of us keeps waiting for others not decision will be taken :-/
That is why I think that it would be worth having this discussion in a special topic in the koha-devel mailing list.
Then everybody will participate and share about the subject, and then maybe we could reach a global consensus in agreement with the whole community (Maybe we should wait for the end of summer to launch such a discussion, as many people are currently on vacation :)).
End of summer isn't until april :) But seriously, if you mean the end of northern hemisphere summer, that is fine, but do we need to hold this patch until then? It is feature that a lot of people have been asking for, has close to 100% test coverage and works well. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.